Timeline for Music: mathematical point of view (revised)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 7, 2012 at 18:18 | vote | accept | Papiro | ||
| Jul 11, 2012 at 17:42 | comment | added | o a | Are there (online) samples of music generated with the category theoretic techniques from the book? | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 15:20 | comment | added | G. Rodrigues | @David Feldman: "from an empirical body of value judgements by a population of listeners, deduce structural correlates" That could constitute an interesting exercise in a theory of taste but is hardly relevant for the consideration of the total, aesthetic musical order. More general, from what little you wrote, methinks we would violently disagree on some general philosophical points: on the nature of the Good or about the reduction of the mind to the brain. But this is off-topic, so I will just shut-up. | |
| Jul 6, 2012 at 2:45 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by S. Carnahan♦ | ||
| Jul 5, 2012 at 19:45 | comment | added | David Feldman | @G. Rodrigues: One could reasonably hope to do this (and mathematics would matter): from an empirical body of value judgements by a population of listeners, deduce structural correlates. Beyond mere statistical methods, mathematics would contribute potentially relevant abstract models, sine qua non even for formulating statistical questions. Mathematical methods also might predict or postdict those structural correlates from known or hypothetical neural dynamics. So one might even succeed in quantifying some received idea of "good" and "bad" associated with certain stakeholders. | |
| Jul 5, 2012 at 18:48 | comment | added | G. Rodrigues | @David Feldman: "They are mostly failures...mathematics won't tell you what is good and what is bad art because the question isn't well-defined". Probably nitpicking, but saying the question is "ill-defined" is itself an answer of sorts to the question of what is good or bad art. A more correct answer is simply to say that the question, like all general philosophical questions, is not amenable to a mathematical treatment because what counts as "good" or "bad" art is not quantifiable or measurable -- words taken in the broadest possible sense. | |
| Jul 5, 2012 at 18:28 | comment | added | David Feldman | Various mathematicians, most famously G.Birkhoff, have attempted mathematical theories of aesthetics. They are mostly failures...mathematics won't tell you what is good and what is bad art because the question isn't well-defined -- the best one could hope for is that an individual might devise a mathematical model of his or her own biases. The Topos of Music is not a book about aesthetics. Rather it developments value-neutral mathematics that might have applications to machine environments for music composition and performance, and also to creating databases for musicological research. | |
| Jul 5, 2012 at 18:22 | history | answered | David Feldman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |